◆ SpookStack

” FD-302a (Rev. 10-6-95) 27 9A-WF-222936-BEI Continuation of FD-302 of Dr. Bruce &. Ivins ,On 11/01/2007 __,Page Refuted by the interviewing agents based on the fact that his (Dr. IVINS's) February 2002 FBIR preparation was rejected because he had used home-made TSA slants, which was contrary to the protocol outlined in the subpoena attachment. The interviewing agents pointed out that it would certainly make sense for Dr. IVINS to have followed the protocol for his submission in April instead of continually being rejected. Furthermore, Dr. IVINS was advised, that absent the subpoena protocol, it is reasonable to assume that he would have used the correct slants (Remel brand, or equivalent), and inoculated them ‘as he had done in February. However, the phenotypic and genetic analyses indicate deception with regard to the April submission of RMR-1029 to the FBIR, when compared to the results obtained for his February preparation of RMR-1029. ° He did not know the importance of RMR~1029 at that time. Refuted by the interviewing agents, since RMR-1029 was the largest, most pure, most concentrated, batch of Bacillus anthracis Ames spores at USAMRIID, and had been used in numerous aerosol challenges since its production in 1997. In addition, it was explained that no one could argue against the importance of RMR-1029 during that timeframe, since it was believed that RMR-1029 could have been stolen and used directly for the mailings. This is especially important when taken in conjunction with the fact that Dr. IVINS knew that RMR-1029 looked similar to the mailing material. This coupled with the fact that for the investigation, RMR-1029, the parental material used in the mailings, was the most important submission to the FBIR. Additionally, a true submission was not obtained by investigators until it was seized in April 2004, causing a two year delay in the identification and follow-on analyses of RMR- 1029, During the middle of the interview with Dr. IVINS, and to change the direction of the_conversation, Dr. IVINS was requested to identify who was | Upon hearing the name, Dr. IVINS immediately pushed away from e table, crossed his arms and legs, exerted what he claimed to be a Fifth Amendment privilege, and refused to discuss anything about the name. Dr. IVINS was informed that the investigators were unaware of any case connections between the name and the mailing